cheapseats

I have no interest whatsoever in Baldelli. He's one of Felix Pie's top comparables in multiple projection systems, for one thing. Why trade for a guy when we already have a similar player in the system. For another, I expect his numbers to drop dramatically next year rather than improve. He's not a particularly disciplined hitter (his OBP is driven by his batting average). His batting average on balls in play last year was .338, but his line drive percentage was only 15.6%. Maybe his luck holds up, but I'm expecting him to look like Corey Patterson circa 2004 next year - not a terrible player, but not a difference maker, and probably not worth nearly what it would take to get him.

Only because human language cannot adequately describe the greatness of Kent.

Sure, but teams deal for what they need. The Cubs need a left-handed bat and they need a CF. The A's and Red Sox don't.

He can ask for whatever he wants. But everyone knows Church isn't one of the organization's favorite players. And nobody will trade much for a guy that has never played a full season in the MLB. It's frustrating to think that Chicago probably could have gotten Church and a prospect or two if they had offered Pierre last year.

Yes!

I'm for it.

I'm in a points-per-reception league at work. Going into tonight's game, I had 98 points and my opponent had 102. He has Steve Smith, and I have Brian Westbrook. I cringe every time Delhomme drops back to pass.

You know Lilly's mechanics?

Kent Touch This Very, very good. Right now I am picturing him doing the Hammer dance after a strikeout. In genie-like stirrup pants.

This made me :lol:

A coup is getting a gold-glove shortstop for an aging pitcher with an 82 mph fastball. Viva la Hendry!

Also he has a low OBP. he at least was always gritty, which is what counts more than anything in baseball. Also there are home runs.

I thing you are getting off on a tangent This made me LOL. Thus, this emoticon would be appropriate: :lol:

Maybe that is the case because Dunn swings and misses more balls the Murton, perhaps? Yeah, which is exactly why he'd be a better #2 hitter. A strikeout counts for one out. A double play counts for two. I'm dunn arguing about it. As long as Jim Hendry is GM, there's no way the Cubs would acquire such a hitter anyway.

That's a pretty big "if," though. I want Murton to do well, but as I've argued in other threads, his batted ball data suggests he's not going to become a middle-of-the-order hitter. He could end up being a very valuable player, but I have doubts about the Cubs using him in the best way possible.

The mods have been alerted.

Yeah, in the short term I'd rather have Abreu, too.

The prototypical #2 hitter might have been a good idea in the 60's. Most managers still make in-game decisions as if it were the 60's. Bob Gibson isn't on the mound anymore. Nobody has a 1.12 ERA. The value of a walk has increased. "Manufacturing runs" is something that should be going on at the bottom of the order, not the top.

No Cub had an OBP higher than Dunn's last year, and last year was a bad year for Dunn. Who cares about his batting average? I do. OBP is great and all, but a high OBP doesn't excuse a piss poor batting average. I love guys who can get on base in general, but I also love guys who can hit their way on. A walk is nowhere near as valuable as a hit can be. Agreed. And if Dunn could figure it that there is more to baseball then the LONG homeruns (coughssingles/doubles), his batting average would go up, and OBP would literally reach the level that Bonds was at for the last few yrs. THAT is why Dunn is a pretty solid #5 or 6 hitter, not higher than that. Actually, he'd be an awesome #2 hitter. A lot of people advocate Murton for #2, for example, but Murton hits into double plays at nearly twice the rate of Dunn. I'm convinced that the Dunn-haters don't like him for aesthetic reasons.

No Cub had an OBP higher than Dunn's last year, and last year was a bad year for Dunn. Who cares about his batting average?

That's just crazy talk.

Murton's Davenport Fielding Rate was five runs above average. According to Chris Dial's metric, he was eight runs above average. PMR also ranked Murton as one of the better left fielders in the NL. Go ahead and insert "but my eyes tell me..." comments here. But Dusty told me Murton was a bad fielder. That's why Dusty always took him out of the game in the 6th inning. Dusty didn't need stats to know that first inning sac bunts win ballgames, that Jacque Jones needed a fresh start to show he could hit lefties, and that pitch counts don't matter. :-k

Murton's Davenport Fielding Rate was five runs above average. According to Chris Dial's metric, he was eight runs above average. PMR also ranked Murton as one of the better left fielders in the NL. Go ahead and insert "but my eyes tell me..." comments here.

Pie's projected numbers as a major leaguer in 2007: .258 .303 .423 For 2008: .262 .311 .432 http://firstinning.com/players/Felix-Pie-470/

Using an aburdity does not futher your positon. It only weakens it. Hey! Not only did I use a smiley, but I used the phrase, "In all seriousness" after that. I think you're being testy. I agree with you about having power on the bench. I've hated the construction of the Cubs' bench in recent years. I don't understand the Hendry/Dusty fascination with utility bench players who have little pop. I'd rather have Russell Branyan on the bench than Jose Macias no matter how many positions Jose can play. But I think you're creating a false dilemma. Platooning isn't an either/or type of situation. If you platoon, you don't have to weaken the bench, and you don't have to increase payroll. Jacque Jones, for example, had the 11th highest VORP of any RF last year, so even though he's not a favorite here, he performed well enough to be an every day player and to be played like an every day player. But the Cubs could have gained about 100 points in OPS if they had put Michael Restovich in the lineup when a lefty was one the mound. They would have gotten more production out of RF, had Jacque's bat on the bench if/when the other team brought in a righty reliever, and they wouldn't have added payroll as Restovich was making league minimum. I'm not even arguing that Restovich is a very good player, but he would have been a better use of a roster spot than John Mabry, for example, who offered nothing off the bench.